In a field where every itsy-bitsy, teeny weenie,
yellow polka-dot, incremental improvement is heralded as a startling new
breakthrough in audio technology and performance, it's damn hard to separate the
wheat from the chaff, "Truth" from "hype." As plainly as I can, with my funky
old face hanging out, I'm here to tell ya Harmonic Technology's subversive CyberLight interconnect cables are an original (Patent pending) deployment of
glass fiber and laser-like technology to the audio realm—where metal
interconnecting cables have ruled since Alexander Graham Bell invented the
telephone (1876). CyberLights are a new application of the relatively young
technology we call fiber-optics. They may become the bell weather for an
industry's development of a new generation of interconnects.

Bell did invent something called the "photophone,"
which used light waves to reproduce human speech at about the same time as he
invented the telephone, but it didn't catch on. They didn't understand quantum
mechanics, light as wave/particle. Hell, back then they didn't have much of a
handle on germ theory. I know a little about this stuff because my wife Grammy Dudious (who grows more regal and stately as we mature) is a member of the AAAS,
the American Association for the Advancement of Science—the founding of which
in 1880 was largely fathered over by Alexander Graham Bell—and we receive
their 125 year old publication, Science magazine.

Along with fiber-optic technology, CyberLight cables
bring a new level of performance. On that, my young audio buddy and neighbor,
CSPAN's Paul Loeschke, concurs, saying, "I've never heard anything as clean."
You might say, "Well here comes Old Man Max crying 'Wolfhound' again." And you
might be right. I am an admitted cheerleader—but not a shill—for the
industry. (A cheerleader praises good stuff: a shill praises all stuff.) I
delight in real improvements. I seldom knock a product because, as Casey said, "That ain't my style." I'll refuse to review something I don't believe in, or is
only a me-too product. Sometimes I err on the side of over-enthusiasm. Then
again, if you don't believe me, wait 'til all the reviews on CyberLights pile up
from the usual suspects in rival publications. Over time, I think the raw
capabilities of CyberLight cables will build a fast following, here, at Positive
Feedback Online—and in all the other publications, electronic and
otherwise—because once again Jim Wang and his gang have raised the bar. (When I
say "fast" following, I mean "fast" in the sense that they will quickly build a
following, and in the sense that this following will be loyal as in
"color-fast," or dyes that don't fade.) Wait 'til you hear 'em. I agree with
everything Robert H. Levi, my PFO colleague, has written. (See Bob's initial impressions of the CyberLights elsewhere in this issue of PFO at
http://www.positive-feedback.com/Issue17/cyberlights.htm.) I might be even
more enthusiastic than he is. If I wrote out all my positive thoughts, you might
think me madly in love with a technology, an audiophile in the kinkiest sense.
(I leave that to your lurid imagination.)

To best express some of my thoughts about cables
I'll remind you there is a new book about translating the untranslatable called
In Other Words. In it the author, Christopher J. Moore, brings up terms in
foreign languages whose meaning might take a paragraph in English to
communicate. For example, in Japanese there is a noun, "tatemae," that is a term
often translated in English as "form," or "good form." It has a more specific
cultural meaning that I think applies to the audio field as, "the reality
everyone professes to be true, even though they may not believe it privately." I
think a lot of audiophiles say they recognize that interconnect cables can
affect the sound, but they don't think of cables as important components in
their system. For a long time I was such an audiophile, even though I knew in my
private thoughts cables made a (sometimes big) difference. As a tweaker, I
thought I could "voice my system" by changing capacitor values in my preamp.
Goetz Alpha-Core copper and silver ribbon cables, and Harmonic Technology copper
and silver cables (with their emphasis on geometry, lay, and insulation) turned
me around. I couldn't get such improvements with my old system of inexpensive
do-it-yourself cables plus voicing my Levinson JC-2 preamp with equalization
circuits, no matter how hard I tried. There was a degree of cleanliness that I
couldn't attain.

It was then that my reviewing duties became a kind
of in-home cable-appreciation course. I have really listened hard to a lot of
cables.

A Short Vignette

I have an audio buddy who comes in town to visit
friends and family every so often. He's a savvy guy, like you and me, who's been
around to the shows, and driven absurd distances to audio boutiques to hear the
latest and the greatest. And, lest you think I'm doing a ventriloquist trick,
having some anonymous puppet speak for me here, I'll name names: and the winner
is... Corno di Basssetto. He is a real-life New England cardiologist who hears
very acutely. He has to. He relies on his Golden Ears in dealing with most
serious diagnostic situations almost every day. He's a real guy, and not me, nor
a surrogate. A hard-working doc, he's also my oldest friend. We've been through
a lot of buddy stuff together, a lot of audio stuff, and I even introduced him
to his wife. David Robinson has spoken with him on the phone to verify his
existence in a different area code than mine, and he contributes record reviews
to PFO. [The Maxmeister is right; I can vouch for the fact that Corno is a very
real person, and neither a nom de plume nor an alter-ego of Max's. Signed, Ye
Olde Editor….] Oh yeah, we often disagree about books, movies, CDs, and audio
gear, arguing into the night. We like to argue. With him I am the champion of "low culture" (jazz, bluegrass, etc.) to his advocacy of
"high culture" (Bach,
Brahms, Beethoven, etc.), while in print I strive to widen the classical
audience.

I am very familiar with Corno's system: matter of
fact, I built his "Big Dude" loudspeakers for him nearly twenty years ago, and
I've been keeping him up to date with improved drivers ever since. I know that
except for his preference for tubed amplifiers, and mine for transistorized amps
on these speakers, we get pretty similar sound. He was here a while ago, and,
after unwinding from a day of traveling with a nice dinner and some pleasant
wine at a nearby bistro, we started listening. After a while he started to shake
his head, and I feared I was about to get a lot of negative crap from him. He's
outspoken, and he's been very disenchanted with some review products that were
in-house during his visits. For example, to some headphones I had about the
place his response was, "Underwhelming." And to a middling amp, "Where's the
beef?" I was girding my loins for a fight. I screwed my courage to the sticking
post, gave him my best Woody Allen look, palms up, shoulders shrugged, eyebrows
elevated toward the center, and said, "What?"

Nastier than that. More like "WHAT!?!"

"Fabrizzi is here! (He sometimes breaks into Peter
Sellers imitations, getting me to laugh to quell my rising ire. Since the HBO
biopic on Sellers, he's been refining his chops.) Madre de Dios! What hava you
changed in your system since Fabrizzi was last here? The difference is multa
bella."

"I thought I was going in a positive direction. All
I changed was the interconnect cables, and all you do is shake your head."

"Fabrizzi shakes his heads in disbelief. The sound
she is as wonderful and pure as the love beams between Tony Roma and Gina
Romantica. It's hard to believe-a all you change-a was-a them interconnect
cables to get so improvement expressivo. Multa Bella!"

"What's changed? WHAT!?!"

"Tutti! Tutti is-a changed. There is-a more clear.
The soundstage is-a more space. There is-a more detail. With CDs Fabrizzi he's-a
know so well, he hears so much-a more. Cleaner highs, clearer lows. More blooms
in-a the middle than with my tubed system. More bald violin playing. How you say
in English, 'hairless'? Lacking from what heavy-metal rockers call 'fuzz-tone.'
That's a-nice. Less fuzz on the violins. Also lo-coloration coloratura soprano
and tenor voices. What have changed? Tutti! Everything have-a changed. Is
unbelievable. Fabrizzi he's-a thought to get such gains in performance,
Maximiliano, you'd have-a to invest in Ferrari-priced amps."

End Vignette

With that, Peter Sellers exited stage right, and he
was Corno again. We went on arguing about the relative cost/benefit ratios of
various amplifiers, and various interconnects. One thing was clear, Corno said,
my entire system had jumped a notch or two, say, from a B+ to an A system
(hop-scotching over A-), with my CD player patched to my pre-amp, and my pre-amp
patched to my amplifier via the Harmonic Technology CyberLight interconnects. I
had achieved an "A" rating from one of my most critical listeners. My system was
delivering everything from the exquisite detail of a Bach violin-harpsichord
sonata (Bach, J.S., Four Violin Sonatas; BBC Music, Vol. 8, No. 3), to the wall
of sound in a Rock 'n' Blues finale (Taj Mahal, The Real Thing; Columbia, LP G
30619), in particular, "You Ain't No Street-Walker Mama, Honey, But I Do Love
The Way You Strut Your Stuff ." I was forced to agree.

A Little Theory

How is such a thing possible? Well, consider Copper: how malleable it is, and how it can improve with high purity and "Ono Constant
Casting"; how some folks send their cables for either "cable cooking," or "cryogenic" treatments. How some manufacturers believe that silver plating the
copper filaments improves performance. How others make a fuss about dielectric
characteristics of the insulation, and the geometry and lay of the filaments, or
the bundles of filaments. Each of these things improves the performance a small
notch. All together they make a big notch.

Copper metal is, after all, made up of crystals that
have to "interface" with each other. Across this interface between crystals is
space, space filled with vacuum, or nitrogen and oxygen (air). When the current
goes across this interface it arcs like an itsy-bitsy, teenie-weenie sparkplug,
and no treatment, no number of nines, no silver plating, no geometry, can stop
it. To a lesser extent, this is true of silver as well. (It is said silver has
more dense crystalline structure, that they make "tunnels" for the electrons to
traverse with far fewer collisions. We believe electrons jump in and out of
copper crystals with enough force to move the crystals "off axis," out of
optimally quiet position.) Silver, being denser, is more stable while passing
signal, a quieter audio conductor, and "silver solder" has gained many believers
among audio guys. As a result of passing signal, all metal cables have to put up
with a certain amount of noise that sounds like "dioding hash." Shrewd designers
can reduce this noise, but no metal cable can completely eliminate it. The
frequency of this hash is in the treble range and it rides on top of violin
notes and cymbals, etc. You recognize its presence by its absence.

More Hypothetical Theory

You hear its absence on violins played through
CyberLight fiber-optic cables, which offer a lower noise floor, less tizz, less
boom, inkier silences, cleaner cleans, blacker blacks, wider wides, and deeper
deeps. CyberLight cables really do reduce tizz, and so offer cleaner violins,
cymbals, and any instruments whose overtone structure is in the tweeter's range.
For example, on Dave Brubeck's Time Out CD (Columbia CK 65122), the drummer
uses a sizzle cymbal on "Take Five." Through lesser cables the "sizzle" (or
sound made by pop-rivets riding in holes drilled in the larger cymbal) is often
blurred by hash and is hard to discriminate. Through CyberLights there is more
clearly delineated sound, and it is clearer than ever there is a sizzle-cymbal
in use. Without any metal conductors, CyberLights eliminate "dioding hash"
subjectively experienced as "tizz" or excessive sibilance.

In a similar fashion, metal filaments interact with
their insulation much like a capacitor to create some extra bloom. Bloom, in
general, is something we like. It is a euphonic (coming from the same Greek word
as euphoric) coloration. Being sweet sounding, it makes us feel good, healthy.
But, as with many other things, bloom can be overdone. Capacitive reactions can
cause signal to bloom in the low frequencies, muddying the bass. This was common
of early polymer capacitors that bloated the mid-bass (and deep bass) that was
characteristic of the "warm" sound of tubed amps and preamps. Since physical
chemistry has gotten a handle on the mechanism of electron storage, or the "Q-Factor"of dielectrical (or capacitive) materials, most of the better cables
use more audio-appropriate insulation (Polyethylene, Teflon™, and related
molecules). These insulators reduce bloom, but they still don't totally
eliminate it.

Some number of electrons jump off the metal
conductors and into the insulation, and they are stored there for a small amount
of time, and then they are forced back into the metal by more recently arriving
electrons that are at a higher energy state. These late-coming electrons arrive
in real time somewhat behind the "main signal." What we get is, say, 90% or 95%
of the main signal, mixed with 5% or 10% of the delayed signal. This makes for
time-smearing. Without any insulation, fiber-optic cables really do reduce
mid-range smearing and masking, so offering cleaner sound with increased detail.
For similar reasons, but to a somewhat lesser degree (but equally important),
CyberLight cables offer better textured bass. We hear the note of the bass viol,
but we hear the woodiness as well (hear cut 12 on Shirley Horn's CD, You Won't
Forget Me; Verve, 847 482-2). With an electric bass we hear the note, and we
simultaneously hear the quality of sound that identifies it as an electric
rather than an acoustic bass (hear cuts #2 and #3 on Billy Joel's CD An Innocent
Man; Columbia, CK 38837). Such sonic differences I think of as "texture" or "nuances" that allow us to differentiate such things as acoustic from amplified
bass, or the harmonic overtone structure that allows us to differentiate a note
played on a clarinet (or oboe, or English horn) from the same note played on a
trumpet (or French horn, or cello).

I think—and again I am not an engineer nor have I
the test instruments necessary to measure such very small values—these
improvements (or reduction of offensive colorations) in reduced bass bloom,
mid-range time-smearing, and "dioding hash" riding on the trebles, are what
Corno di Bassetto and I heard that night. It is almost impossible to describe
the giddy and lightheaded rush we shared in my listening room, like when we were
kids and one of us discovered a great recording. Or when di Bassetto got a
Pickering Flux-Valve cartridge, or Waxie Maxie got his first stereo cartridge—a Fairchild, designed by Joe Grado. "I wonder how X might sound," he'd say, and
I'd find my recording of "X." And I'd say, "What about the bass on that old Y
record?" and I'd dig out "Y." And so on, and so on. We've been doing this
routine for a long, long time and it's still exciting. We've learned "how to
listen" from each other over the years.

A Random Thought

Sometimes the oldies of classical music prove not
to be so golden. The engineering might be way less than ideal by today's
standards, as in Turnabout's 1967 Rachmaninoff's Symphonic Dances, which was a
highly-touted audiophile item. Or the performance might be considerably ragged,
such as in the 1962 Berlioz' Symphony Fantastique (Charles Munch, Boston Symph.
Orch.; RCA 7735-2-RV). We've concluded, "Not every Oldie is so Goldie."
[Today's
tout is tomorrow's doubt, sez Ye Olde Editor.] Though sometimes our informal,
subjective tests show some products, such as the CyberLights, are up to advance
notices.

Some Tough Recordings

On this night, it was time for a series of
torture-test recordings of old CDs and LPs, such as: screechy strings
(Bernstein's Candide; Columbia, MK 38732), too flaccid bass drums (Rachmaninoff,
Symphonic Dances; Donald Johanos, Dallas Symph. Orch.; Turnabout-Vox LP, TV
34145S), jagged and harsh crescendi (Bruckner's 4th Symphony; Georg Solti,
Chicago Symphony; London, 410 550-2), muddied diminuendi (Mahler's 3rd Symphony; Jasha Horenstein, London Symph. Orch; Unicorn LP UN 1198 Stereo) a
Grand Prix du
Disque winner in 1970; the nasal quality of Willie Nelson's voice; the
tad-too-tizzy cymbals on the Shirley Horne album; the sometimes wooly texture of
Billy Joel's bassist; each of which was "cleaned up" and improved upon by the
CyberLights. On Billy Joel's An Innocent Man, we could hear differences in bass
recording technique from track to track I'd never noticed (that's how well the
cables were doing). And the original cast Candide CD never sounded so good.

Nearly all of the considerably small (but annoying)
distortion products we had come to think of as inherent in even the best audio
reproduction with excellent metal cables (fuzz on bowed strings, metallic
coloration on human voice, contraction of sound stage due to time-smearing of
spatial cues, over-emphasized bass bloom) were reduced or absent. Significantly
decimated or totally gone were distortion products we'd assumed were in the
recording equipment (noise coming from obsolete studio cables, agèd microphones,
or miniaturized mixing boards with tantalum caps). Having lowered the noise
floor, and better captured subtle spatial cues, the size of the soundstage
increased, and we two old skeptics were out of our heads, over the moon.

More Opinion

Good SACDs (those originally well-recorded in SACD)
sounded absolutely unbefreakinglievable; well-engineered regular old CDs sounded
pretty damn good; and many old ones, even CDs of performances dating to the '30s
and '40s, sounded respectable. It was what the industry promised when CDs were
first released twenty years ago, when the world was young.

I have to tell you about my house. It sits mid-town
in a modern city, blocks away from radio stations, on direct line of sight to a
giant multi-purpose transmitting tower that handles TV, FM radio, microwave,
etc., about a mile away. My house is on high ground amidst a matrix of
broadcast, microwave, and cellular telephone transmissions. It is a 120 year-old
Victorian wood frame house that amounts to a three story antenna, because it has
wiring in it that has to remain. To remove it all would mean tearing into lots
of plastered walls. I have done what I can to insure a dedicated line (a modern
Romex, shielded and grounded 3-wire circuit) from the fusebox to the in-wall
(Furu-Tech) socket for my music system. CyberLight cables minimized (or totally
eliminated) admittedly-small-but-nasty distortion products that have been
bugging me for years.

Six More Caveats

I should add some cautions here:

1) We examined these cables as if on logarithmic
paper where the last few percentage points are represented in expanded scale so
they may be viewed in greater detail.

2) We listened at increased volume, to hear the
smallest glitches, the least bit of hum, the least bit of congestion on the
loudest crescendo.

3) We listened to silence with the volume full on.

4) We listened to some really annoying recordings.
We figure if they make pretty bad recordings sound passable, they'll make
average recordings sound damn good. And they do.

5) CyberLight cables best show their stuff
in truly good systems, and as a correction for systems that are a tad too
bright. They can't solve the woes of a problematic room, or a difficult system.
But relative to even Harmonic Technology's best metal cables, they improve the
performance in these ways: they are quieter, more spacious, because they clean
up highs (less tizz), lows (less boom), and mids (less smearing) as described
above.

6) The improvements they offer are best noticed when
played loudly through an already high resolution system. (This could be
more a statement about my system, which sounds better as it approaches facsimile
of recording loudness.)

Where lesser cables get into trouble, the
CyberLights sail smoothly along. When the only change in the A/B comparison is a
swap-out of interconnects, we can most likely conclude the audible differences
are due to the cables (though this might have a round-about, multi-variable
path, one that includes room interactions, measured cable impedance differences,
etc.).

More Opinion

How is this possible? CyberLight cables convert
audio signals to light pulses. If you think about it, you've probably seen
something like this also executed in the analog domain. Do you remember the "light show" kind of hookup that was popular some years ago in night clubs and
discotheques? Right on! (If you do, you're old.) If you don't, then let me
explain: the light was variously broken into different colored bulbs, say, red,
yellow, and blue. Using a relatively simple circuit, not unlike a crossover in a
loudspeaker, the hi, middle, lo frequencies could be separated and routed to
yellow, red, and blue bulbs, for example. When the music changed frequency, the
appropriate lights would come on and off. With a simple resistor network on each
part of the bandwidth, as the volume increased and decreased the light would get
brighter and dimmer. Skillfully designed, such a simple system could enhance the
effect of the music. I remember seeing units like this for home audio systems on
sale at Radio Shack during the disco period, designed with the party-animal in
mind.

More Hypothetical Theory

The current Harmonic Technology CyberLight system is
light years ahead of the "light show," which I mentioned only to give us all a
handle, or thought model, or a word picture with which to grasp the technology.
The advances made during the decades of development in telephone and microwave
data-transmission systems, plus their miniaturization and refinement, have made
CyberLights possible. These two technologies have gotten very sophisticated, and
the telephone and data transmission companies routinely convert audio into
digits and uplink to satellites. For their purposes, they've satisfactorily
worked out the problems of analog to digital conversion; clock synchronization,
jitter, error correction, sound shaping, drop-outs, digital back to analog, etc.

Without the need for satellite transmission,
Harmonic Technology (HT) has streamlined things; audio to light at the input,
transmission through fiber-optic glass cables (but not TOSLink, thankfully!),
and conversion from light to audio again at the far end. The signal is never
digitized. HT takes audio and converts it to light with a micro-chip circuit
small enough to fit inside an RCA plug housing. Utilizing a 12 v. power supply,
this active circuit takes the light and passes it through fiber-optic glass
cables, and at the far end uses a tiny circuit that reverses the light back to
audio. They claim this system is practically lossless; any attenuation over some
pretty remarkable distances is operating below the limit of the measuring
instruments. Thinking about it as though it were a digital/TOSlink system will
only confuse you.

Harmonic Technology calls this miniature circuit
their LAM (or Light Analog Module) Photon Transducer Light Signal. This is
analogous to the Analog to Digital Converter, but not the same since, again, the
music is never digitized by the LAM. Rather, the music is converted from analog
signal directly to light that they think of as a Photon Density Modulated
signal. As a secondary benefit, the optical method of transferring the signal
breaks the ground. This insures that there is no possibility of the cables
passing junk signal between components, nor acting as an antenna for RFI
(broadcast interference) or EMI (home computer or refrigerator) induced
distortions, which further lowers noise floor and further reduces smearing. In
my system, even with my Monster HTS 7000 AC power conditioner and AVS 2000
automatic voltage regulator, I've noticed a notch more inky black velvet
background, with sounds arising from discrete spots in space.

If you're a guy whose system must always be on the
leading edge of fine audio technology, Cyberlights are for you. If you are a guy
who wants to kick performance up a notch, Cyberlights are for you.

Of course, there is the question of whether these
cables are worth the price. To which I can only say, I can't make that call; "Is
it worth it?" is a question that only you can answer. In the abstract, there is
always the question of whether this or that technological improvement increases
performance enough to justify replacing what is currently out there. There are
some (if not many) really good metal cables that are in the same price range,
whose performance comes reasonably close. But to tell you the truth, I can't
think of any I've heard that do as many things as well as the CyberLights. Then
again, to survey all the cables on the market would be a Sisyphusian task,
because as fast as I could review one pair of cables, there would be another two
new designs introduced.

Nevertheless, I can say that I've never heard a pair
of metal cables sound as "natural" as these.

A Brief Cost/Benefit Analysis

To minimally hear what the CyberLights can do, you'd
have one pair of interconnects from your SACD or CD player to your preamp. This
cable is specially designed to avoid the possibility of mismatched impedances,
is called the CyberLight Wave, and retails for $1499. You also have to have a
Cyber Power Pack, for an additional $399, to supply current to the circuitry. In
addition, you also ought to have a Cyberlight P2A (that's code for "preamp to
amp") interconnect for another $1499. That's about $3500 for a set of cables,
including power pack. You have to be prepared to think of this three piece set
as a necessary component.

Then again, it is an active component, and there are
some number of headphone amps, line stages, and even metal interconnect cables
that are in this price class. So CyberLight cables are not out of range for the
cable market, though they do demand to be considered in the top rung of price
and performance.

Do they measure up? I think so, but that's a matter
of opinion. Are they worth the price? I think so, but that's just my personal
decision. For more technical information see their website
http://www.harmonictech.com, and surf around until you find their "white
paper" on CyberLight interconnects in the "Products" section. There you will
find more information about:

LAM (Light Analog Module) Photon Transducer Light
Signal

CyberLight Total Impedance Control for Wave
Source-to-Preamp link

Cyber Power Pack Battery/Charger For Total Isolation
and Best Sound

How CyberLights Break Ground between Components

Bandwidth of 5Hz to 30MHz

Photon Light Signal Immune from Effects of RFI/EMI

Cables Never Act As Antennae

Can be Terminated With Either High Quality RCA or
XLR plugs

Long Runs of up to 200m With No Signal Loss

Super Flexible & Easy to Install

To Sum Up

CyberLight Cables break new ground and are a
potential revolution in cable design, manufacture, and performance. They escape
the bounds of metallurgy and physical chemistry by adapting fiber-optics to fine
audio use. They break the ground between the components they connect, freeing my
system from all but the slightest traces of hum, buzz, hash, or white noise even
with the volume all the way up, and even when they are not passing signal. (At
full volume they do pass a very slight, very clean, whirring sound that I think
is my heating system's circulation pump, and that I could never hear before
because of all the other crud on the line.) That makes them the quietest cables
I've ever had in my system. I assume with standard cables all that mixture of
audio noise blends in with the music, coloring the sound.

If I'm correct in that assumption, then I can be
categorical: the Harmonic Technology CyberLights are the cleanest, least
colored cables I've ever had in my system. Yes, they are also among the most
expensive cables out there, but if you want the benefit that they can provide,
you have to think of them as a major new component that maximizes performance,
as constant voltage supplies and current conditioners do. Who'd have predicted
we'd have come to think of them as necessary components? I think we'll soon be
forced into thinking of fiber-optic cables as the ne plus ultra in audio
interconnect cables, and necessary to rid excellent systems of audio crud.

Final Caveat

With CyberLights, my system sounded a tad soft, at
first. I think that is because I'd grown accustomed to a lot of treble grunge
riding on my music, mistaking those artificial accents for accuracy in the "presence" section of the frequency band-width. But solo violins and celli are
breath-takingly woody and resiny through Cyberlights. If you are serious about
purchasing these cables, make sure you get the Power Pack with the on/off
switch. It will become obvious how to use it, and the old one is being
redesigned to eliminate some minor problems. If your system already has a "warm"
as opposed to "bright" sonic thumbprint, you might find you'll have to develop a
way to brighten things up.

Final Finale

I've come to trust Jim Wang's engineering savvy
about cable design as he is becoming a leader in the industry. I also trust his
ear about what is "neutral," and "the truth." I believe the CyberLights are it.
Funny, without the various distortions I had been living with, I can play my
music a tad or two louder without my wife complaining—a secondary benefit
which might be the telling datum.

Once again, "Good job!" to the gang at Harmonic
Technology. This time they've raised the bar to a level I didn't think was
possible. So do not pass "GO!" gentle reader. Run right out to your nearest
Harmonic Technology dealer and arrange for a serious audition with your favorite
SACDs, CDs and LPs. Or see if he'll loan you a set to listen to in your home.
Print out this review and take it with you. You won't be sorry.

And you Indie recording studios, you too ought to
listen up to CyberLights. Nothing cleaner! And tell 'em Waxie Maxie Dudious sent
ya!!!